CAS 2019/O/6156 International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) v. Russian Athletic Federation (RUSAF) & Aleksandr Shustov
On 16 July 2016, Professor Richard McLaren (the Independent Person or the IP) issued a first report on the allegations of systemic doping in Russia. Some of the key findings of the First IP Report were that:
1.) the Moscow Laboratory operated, for the protection of doped Russian athletes, within a state-dictated failsafe system, described in the First IP Report as the disappearing positive methodology (DPM) and
2.) the Ministry of Sport of the Russian Federation directed, controlled, and oversaw the manipulation of athletes' analytical results or sample swapping, with the active participation and assistance of the Russian Federal Security Service, the Center of Sports Preparation of National Teams of Russia, and both Moscow and Sochi Laboratories.
On 9 December 2016, the IP elaborated on the First IP Report and released a second report on the doping allegations in Russia, together with the First IP Report. The Second IP Report confirmed the key findings of the First IP Report and described in detail the DPM and the Washout Testing.
Within the context of the Second IP Report, the IP identified a significant number of Russian athletes who were involved in, or benefitted from, the doping schemes and practices that he uncovered. The IP made publicly available on the IP Evidence Disclosure Package (EDP) website the evidence of the involvement of the Identified Athletes. According to the IP and the IAAF, the evidence on the EDP was retrieved from the hard-drive of Dr Rodchenkov and, after the metadata of all the documents was examined, the documents were determined to have been made contemporaneously to the events.
Mr. Aleksandr Shustov is a Russian high jumper competing in the Moscow 2013 IAAF World Championships.
In November 2017 the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Russian Athlete based on the findings of the First and Second IP Report and the disclosed evidence.
After deliberations between the parties the case was referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in February 2019 for a Sole Arbitrator first instance hearing panel.
The IAAF requested the Panel to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete due to aggravating circumstances and for the disqualification of the Athlete’s results from 8 July 2013 until the date of the decision in this case.
The IAAF contended that the Athlete had used anabolic steroids in the lead-up to the Moscow 2013 IAAF World Championships based on the findings of the Second IP Report and the disclosed evidence (the Moscow Washout Schedules). Here 3 official samples, provided by the Athlete, were reported as negative in ADAMS in 2013 by the Moscow Laboratory while the evidence showed that these samples contained prohibited substances. In addition 2 unofficial samples were listed in the Moscow Washout Schedules in 2013 containing prohibited substances. Furthermore one of the Athlete’s B sample bottles had multiple T marks as evidence of tampering.
The Athlete challenged the Sole Arbitrator, denied the use of prohibited substances and disputed the reliability of the filed evidence in this case provided by the IAAF, Professor McLaren and Dr Rodchenkov. Sustained by expert witnesses, he pointed to various inconsistencies in this evidence.
The Sole Arbitrator concludes that the Athlete is present in the Moscow Washout Schedules in respect of the 5 samples listed as belonging to the Athlete. Here the Athlete’s presence in the Moscow Washout Schedules are strong indication that the Athlete used the prohibited substances Methandrostenolone (Methandienone) and Methasterone in 2013 as corroborated by the evidence.
The Sole Arbitrator finds that the Athlete's repeated denials and challenges were exposed as empty and his attempts at alternative scientific explanations for the facts were comprehensively refuted.
Accordingly the Sole Arbitrator finds that the IAAF has proven to his comfortable satisfaction that the Athlete violated the IAAF Rules through the use of multiple prohibited substances on multiple occasions. Considering the seriousness of the Athlete's violations and the fact that many aggravating factors are relevant in this case, the Sole Arbitrator finds that a 4 year period of ineligibility is appropriate. Finally the Sole Arbitrator deems it appropriate to disqualify the Athlete's results from 8 July 2013 until 7 July 2017.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 5 June 2020 that:
1.) CAS has jurisdiction to decide on the subject matter of this dispute and the Request for Arbitration of the International Association of Athletics Federations is admissible and is upheld.
2.) Aleksandr Shustov is found guilty of anti-doping rule violations under Rule 32.2(b) of the IAAF Rules.
3.) A period of ineligibility of four ( 4) years is imposed upon Aleksandr Shustov, commencing on the date of this A ward.
4.) All competitive results obtained by Aleksandr Shustov from 8 July 2013 to 7 July 2017 are disqualified, with all resulting consequences (including forfeiture of any titles, awards, medals, profits, prizes and appearance money).
5.) The arbitration costs (to be determined and notified by the CAS Court Office) shall be paid by the Russian Athletic Federation.
6.) The Russian Athletic Federation shall contribute the sum of CHF 2,500 (two thousand five hundred Swiss Francs) to the International Association of Athletics Federations' fees and expenses.
7.) Aleksandr Shustov shall contribute the sum of CHF 2,500 (two thousand five hundred Swiss Francs) to the International Association of Athletics Federations' fees and expenses.
8.) All other and further prayers or requests for relief are dismissed.